Johannesburg teacher fired for rape 18 months after pupils' complaints

Three girls, one teacher, four lawyers, 18 months. On Monday, NGO Section 27 announced that a teacher from Eastern Johannesburg accused of rape had been fired.

His dismissal came a year-and-a half after the pupils complained to the Gauteng Department of Education that the teacher was offering them sex in exchange for better marks.

At least one of the teenagers under the age of 16 alleged she had been raped.

Section 27 and NGO Lawyers against Abuse were approached to get involved, after the pupils perceived the disciplinary action was taking too long.

“Disciplinary matters take a long time due to the complexity of a sexual abuse case,” said Professor Bonita Meyersfeld, founder of Lawyers against Abuse.

Meyersfeld said the NGOs prodded and nudged the Gauteng Department of Education investigators.

“Sexual crime is complex. It takes place in private.

“There are no eyewitnesses and there are power discrepancies.”

She said often investigators were incorrectly swayed by factors such as body language.

“A person who is more powerful such as a teacher is more in control.

He will be clearer, more articulate, and confident. These are characteristics, we associate with the truth.”

Often the pupil who has been raped comes across badly. 

“A raped person tends to be traumatised, vague, and hesitant to make eye contact. Her story may be inconsistent.

“These are factors we associate with lying,” said Meyersfeld.

She said her organisation trained Gauteng department of education investigators to work with sexual abuse cases.

They usually were under the misconception they needed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt as in a court of law. This was not needed as disciplinary hearings only require that investigators prove the crime most likely took place on "the balance of probabilities".

The department’s Charles' Phahlane said, “We can confirm that the department instituted disciplinary action against an educator for sexual misconduct.

“He was found guilty and his sanction was dismissal.

He appealed to the MEC but his appeal did not succeed. ”